We're going to hook this thing up to your NMR -- do you mind? Photo credit: Techeblog.com |
The line-up consisted simply of six hydrocoptic marzul vanes so fitted to the ambaphascient lunar wain shaft that side fumbling was effectively prevented. The main winding was of the normal lotus-odeltoid type placed in panendurmic semi-bulloid slots of the stator. Every seventh conductor being connected by a non-reversible tremmy pipe to the differential girdle spring on the up-end of the grammeters. (script from Wikipedia)
It's always interesting to me how jargon gets used. I've found that it's used as a credential; if I meet someone and they talk like a chemist (e.g. they use "diastereotopic" or "phthalate" correctly and without fumbling the pronunciation), I'm more likely to believe what they say. Jargon cannot take the place of an education, but it can be used as a signaling device.
I think the right way to use jargon as a tool for exactness; it can shorten conversations ("NMR" and "TLC" are really helpful abbreviations) and can help you say exactly what you want to say, when you want to say it. Like any tool, there's a time and a place for each use, even when it's connected by a non-reversible tremmy pipe.
Chemists - and I'm sure by extension other scientists - turn sensible proper nouns into verbs (a la "Google it")
ReplyDelete"So I Finkelsteined my product, columned it, and then NMR'd it....turns out I should have E2'd and then Diels-Aldered it instead."
But I also see jargon as necessary at most times. Some ideas are not captured well without it. A good example is "good laboratory practices". If you work for a medical device company, that phrase has a very clear, well defined meaning that the FDA is only too happy to clarify to you as they fine your company and order a recall. But to anyone else, it is a "whatever" idea. (Ask a newly minted chemist in a job interview if they follow "good laboratory practices" and they will say "of course" not knowing what they just stepped into.)
ReplyDelete"Six sigma" and most jargon is a counter example - you either know what it means or you don't and you will never assume that you do if you don't. (You might try and fake it, but that is a totally different story.)
I am unsure if this is related to scientific jargon. But I would be proud to have a disciplinary action record just like this one
ReplyDeletehttp://i163.photobucket.com/albums/t319/Kristian_Maria/Listopad%202010/308469_oneanddone.jpg
@John: I agree. Perhaps the issue is who the conversants (is that a word?) are and if the jargon has coded meaning. For example, "accountability" seems to mean to management types that "somebody has to be responsible for this mess" and it means "we're gonna find a reason to fire one of you" to grunt-level folks.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteOof